I already anticipate many instant nos in the replies here because I appreciate this is a very contentious question, and if you read nothing else, please read the point I make about the semantics of the statement (it's underlined half way down). But hopefully we can have a civilised discussion about it....

IntroThere was a thread earlier which put forwards the question whether Alonso, Hamilton, Vettel, Ricciardo and Verstappen were unanimously considered to be the best on the grid, and it seemed there was a general consensus about that. Obviously, people's ordering within that list differed. I would argue Verstappen is of a diferent generation to those four - and people can argue if Ricciardo and Alonso are direct peers as well, but with Vettel and Hamilton dominating the WDCs of the last 10 years (including 2017, they will have won 8/10) I think we can consider them to be the focal point of their era.

All of the drivers come with baggage, and depending on your own beliefs and own partialities, we'll all weigh up different weaknesses differently. Also, the fickle nature of Formula 1 does mean that the equipment a driver finds himself in will determine a great deal of his success. Of course, at the sharp end of the grid, the teams pay big money for the top talent, as opposed to evaluating their skill/sponsorship ratio, so for any driver to be a net financial loss is a big validation of their talent.

Hamilton, of all of the drivers in the elite group, probably has come with the most baggage historically. As Button commented, when Hamilton was on form, he was untouchable and no one was faster - but there were some weekends where he just didn't check in, and 2011 almost certainly represents the nadir of his Formula 1 career in terms of his own temperament and effort.

Hamilton's HistoryHowever, it's no longer 2011. There's no doubt that Hamilton's time at McLaren started out high - regardless of whether McLaren ended up favouring him in the second half of 2007, it was the fact he was matching Alonso up until that that caused the breakdown at Woking that year. He won the World Championship in his second season (which I actually rate as one of his lowest performance seasons despite containing some of his best drives) - however following the regulation change that elevated the Newey Red Bull to top of the class for a rules era, there's no doubt that his temperament provoked frustration which led to him moving to Brackley.

He was frustrated seeing a driver he views as a lesser talent (Vettel) crank up WDC after WDC while he felt he didn't have equal equipment to take the fight to him.

Of course, the tables were then turned in 2014, when he found himself driving an even more dominant package - however, Mercedes - whether it was they preferred to have a German winner, whether it was because they realised if there wasn't a fight for the WDC it would force the FIA to change the rules against them, or whether Mercedes genuinely did just want "better racing" that "didn't have team orders" allowed their drivers to fight for it.

However, despite whatever friendship history Rosberg and Hamilton had prior to being Merc team mates, it's fair to say Hamilton also considers Rosberg to be inferior to him, so I doubt he ever expected Rosberg to challenge him, and expected to just collect WDCs while Merc reigned supreme. You can see it in his results - going into Abu Dhabi thinking he could lose a championship just due to double points was a mini wakeup and at the start of 2015 he was on it until he mathematically sealed it. Then he checked out for the final few races as the WDC was claimed.

It was 2016 that changed it though - he was beaten by Rosberg. There's no doubt - he had a lot of bad luck, Malaysia in particular - but he also was still mentally absent at some races, and has even alluded to that in recent interviews. When the WDC slipped out of his fingertips, when Rosberg could just follow him home for second and there was nothing he could do about it, it was a very slow and painful wakeup call to him. It wasn't just about his talent - he had to work at it every race, even the ones he can't win.

The present dayWith 2017, he doesn't have out and out the fastest car. Obviously, there is at least one thread dedicated to whether Merc or Ferrari have the fastest car. The general consensus I have gleaned from F1 opinion pieces is that the Merc has the highest peak speed, slightly - but it's the most temperamental, and has bogey tracks like Monaco, Hungary and Singapore. If the Merc nail their set up, they are fastest, but the Ferrari has the more stable and reliable package.

So he finds himself in a battle, in roughly equal equipment, with the guy he feels is a lesser talent who romped away and collected 4 back to back WDCs.

And this brings me back to my original question, and there is a key point in the semantics of it. Is Hamilton NOW rising to be the best of his generation?

This season has seen him take the record for most poles. He now has the highest win rate of the commercial era (only pre 1970s drivers have higher). He's targeting to eclipse Schumacher's 91 wins. Of the 30 rain affected races in his career, he's won 11 (the next highest is Button on 6, but Vettel and Alonso have 4 each - note this is of the 30 that Hamilton has contested). He has the win record on several circuits that have existed since before he joined the sport (Britain, USA, China, Hungary). He's had a win in every season he's competed in. He's had a pole in every season he's competed in. He's won at just about every circuit he's competed at in F1.

Of course, good equipment plays a big part in those records, and his 2014-2016 equipment advantage certainly dished up a sizeable chunk of those results - but let's not pretend that Vettel didn't have a class leading Red Bull for 4.5 years, that Schumacher never drove for a dominating Ferrari team for 5 years or that Senna wasn't in an awesome McLaren for a lot of his.

I feel that Hamilton (and, Vettel also - it has to be said, his Singapore pole lap was exceptional) have both stepped up their game this year. However, I feel that the imperfections that Hamilton seems to have removed his most critical flaws that were holding him back from being considered truly on the level of those who have gone down to be all time greats. And while it's virtually impossible to truly compare drivers between generations we can compare drivers of the same era.

Versus AlonsoFor a long time, I have agonized over whether I felt whether Alonso or Hamilton was the better driver. Hamilton had the edge on speed, but Alonso definitely checked in to every race weekend and delivered week on week out - something that could not always be said about Hamilton (and just having a weekend being slower than your teammate doesn't count, as Alonso was not faster EVERY weekend, but neither was Senna or Schumacher)

Both drivers were able to put cars in places they shouldn't have been, and Alonso's results at Ferrari - particularly in 2012 - are simply incredible. But it's a great tragedy he hasn't been gifted true championship contender of a car since 2007. We only got to see one year of Hamilton versus Alonso - and unfortunately for us Hamilton was in his rookie year and Alonso fell out with his team during the second half of the season. It was far from conclusive and that's why if you raise the question of "who was better in 2007, Alonso or Hamilton" it results in a massive argument with no conclusions.

Personally, I think in 2008, Alonso was still the better driver and would have beaten Hamilton more comfortably (although he wouldn't have schooled him)

If I was picking which driver I wanted over the last 10 seasons, it would have been either a 90% Alonso, or a lot of umming and ahhing for the others, with it generally going 50/50 between the two of them.

However, picking now - if I was picking any driver from the grid now, it would be Hamilton without a second doubt. While the pole record was not much of a surprise, it was when I realised he has a genuine shout of surpassing Schumacher's win count, and that he became the driver with the highest win rate since 1968 that I suddenly took a step back. He's also on course to win 10 races, for four season in a row - which no driver has ever done. He was the first to win 10 in back to back seasons.

Final wordsWhile I know there are going to be a LOT of people who disagree with what I have posted here, I do think we are living through a time in F1 with the greatest talent at the sharp end since the late 1980s, the last golden age. I just think, that of that great talent, Hamilton - even taking into account the equipment advantage of the 2014-2016 seasons - is emerging as the top of the pile as they all start to become totally complete packages. I feel that he was always the greatest natural talent, but in 2017 he's finally addressed the other areas to make himself the complete package.

Vettel is Hamilton's biggest threat to the title of best driver of this generation. He's the only driver in this generation who's statistics and accomplishments are somewhat in the same ballpark as Lewis. If Vettel wins his 5th championship with Ferrari, either this season or the next, he will have a strong claim.

Alonso should have also been a strong contender but unfortunately since 2007 it's been bad decision after bad decision in terms of the teams he choose.

Guys like Rosberg, Button and Raikkonen were all fine drivers but a clear tier below the absolute best.

I'm not sure if Verstappen counts as the same generation as Hamilton. The age gap between them is almost 13 years, it's bigger than the age gap between Alonso and Schumacher.

Sorry to be boring but we're in the middle of the war right now and 2017 is just one of the battles. I had Vettel a touch ahead of Hamilton earlier in the season but that's been balanced out by a couple of key errors since. Hamilton on his best weekend looks more untouchable but the Mercedes itself is likely more untouchable when it's "on" over a weekend, which makes it much easier to create that aura.

Alonso is unique in F1 history, arguably the best driver, a 17-18 year long career and he had conclusively the best car in one single season - 2005 - even that wasn't the fastest car either. Also going 11+ years without a WDC whilst still arguably being the best driver out there. Its a crazy situation.

People who know there stuff will always rate him in with Vettel and Hamilton, but I fear history (10.. 20.. 30 year away) will remember this more as a Hamilton vs Vettel showdown. These two will have 8 WDC's between them at the end of the year - Alonso hasn't won win since they both made there debut and Alonso will likely end with less than half the wins, poles and WDCs of these two.

Also given that Alonso made his debut 6 years before them and his titles were before they arrived, history might put him as the best of the Raikkonen, Button, Montoya, Ralf Schumacher, Webber generation (late 90's / early 00 debutants)

That leaves Hamilton vs Vettel, if Hamilton goes on to win this title it will give him a slight rankings boost. If the season continues as it has been recently then he would have done it with a car that was better 75% of the time. If Ferrari are closer next year and it seems more 50/50 - whoever wins that one will take a big leap toward being viewed as the best.

They both also need to avoid losing to there next team mates, they both appear to have their current ones covered. Vettel can't have another 2014, it would really hurt his legacy. Hamilton is a bit older and already had more in number and talented team mates so I think losing to Max or another young gun when he is 34/35 years old would be a bit more acceptable than if it happened to Vettel say in 2018 whilst Seb is still in peak age. I don't think Hamilton losing the title to Rosberg last year had any affect on his legacy, much like 1989 with Senna. 2011 was much more damaging.

It can go either way, my gut tells me either wrongly or rightly as it stands right now - history would judge Hamilton as the slightly better.

This will probably sound odd, but I don't consider Alonso part of the Ham-Vet generation. He is part of this era.. and the Schumacher era, but I see him as the best of the generation before Ham-Vet-Rosberg.

It's similar to how I don't see Federer as being from the same generation as Nadal and Djokovic but it's certainly been the era of "The Big Three".

I suspect one could make a list of the active forumites as to which ones are going to stand where. I am not any different. I have long maintained that Alonso is the best driver in F1 and has been for 10+ years. As you, yourself has stated, Lewis has had the advantage of vastly superior equipment the last few years, something that Alonso has not had at any point in his career. Certainly, Alonso has made some poor choices in cars over the years, his timing has been quite poor in that respect. But that is not the question you have asked. When it comes to being the best driver, I feel that Alonso is still the best, and to be honest, I don't think that Lewis is anywhere near Alonso as a driver. As I have said many times before, as difficult as it is to compare eras, I don't find any of today's drivers with the possible exception of Fernando Alonso, to be anywhere near the top 10 of all time, and I am not sure that I would put Alonso at that level either, but one could effectively argue for his inclusion to that elite level.

I have no doubt that this thread is going to get quite contentious, and that is a sad thing as I don't believe that is your intent. However, the very subject matter is bound to stir the emotions of the dedicated to one driver or another fan. As for myself, I have had my say on it, and will try like hell to stay out of it further!

I suspect one could make a list of the active forumites as to which ones are going to stand where. I am not any different. I have long maintained that Alonso is the best driver in F1 and has been for 10+ years. As you, yourself has stated, Lewis has had the advantage of vastly superior equipment the last few years, something that Alonso has not had at any point in his career. Certainly, Alonso has made some poor choices in cars over the years, his timing has been quite poor in that respect. But that is not the question you have asked. When it comes to being the best driver, I feel that Alonso is still the best, and to be honest, I don't think that Lewis is anywhere near Alonso as a driver. As I have said many times before, as difficult as it is to compare eras, I don't find any of today's drivers with the possible exception of Fernando Alonso, to be anywhere near the top 10 of all time, and I am not sure that I would put Alonso at that level either, but one could effectively argue for his inclusion to that elite level.

I have no doubt that this thread is going to get quite contentious, and that is a sad thing as I don't believe that is your intent. However, the very subject matter is bound to stir the emotions of the dedicated to one driver or another fan. As for myself, I have had my say on it, and will try like hell to stay out of it further!

I'm just curious with regards to your top 10, Schumacher aside - does a single driver who made their debut after 1984 feature on it?

Formula one is only 67 years old, how many you got from the last 33 years?

This will probably sound odd, but I don't consider Alonso part of the Ham-Vet generation. He is part of this era.. and the Schumacher era, but I see him as the best of the generation before Ham-Vet-Rosberg.

It's similar to how I don't see Federer as being from the same generation as Nadal and Djokovic but it's certainly been the era of "The Big Three".

Once you go over 30 in Tennis the decline is usually quite sharp. Roger being 5 and 6 years older respectively was going over his peak when those two arrived on the scene. 2004-2009 Federer was untouchable. Still winning grand slams at 35/36 is also incredible.

There will be a new star arriving soon, all the "aliens" are getting old. Murray was unlucky to be the same age as those two, if he was 4-5 years younger he would probably have gone down as a great himself.

The story is not yet completely told for this generation. Alonso will be an interesting one to see how he is remembered. He is generally highly respected as a driver but he has gone quite a while without having a real title shot. He lost 3-4 prime years trundling around in the middle and at the back and that's devastating. Especially these three years at McLaren. They just wasted some of his last prime years. The question now is, how many more does he have and will he find himself in position to win before they run out?

Overall Alonso's consitency and speed have delivered great results over the years whenever he's had the car capable of delivering. Ultimately though, his inability to position himself properly to challenge for titles (really through no fault of his own) has left him unable to actually build the kind of legacy that is worthy of his talents. Of couorse he has those 2 WDC titles from more than a decade ago but those things are collecting dust and it's hard to imagine that Fernando Alonso has been unable to win either driver or constructor's championships since his departure from Renault in 2006. He certainly has the ability to be up there fighting it out for championships. He even managed to do so in 2007, 2010 and 2012. He just hasn't been able to regain that perfect team situation that he needs.

Vettel had that great run at Red Bull; breaking all the "youngest ever" records and winning 4 championships. Since leaving and joining Ferrari, he has really come into his own. This season is a huge one for him as it gives him a chance to add to the WDC tally. It's his first truly realistic chance to do that since 2013. He is far less proven than either Hamilton or Alonso as he has not had truly great teammates with the exception of Daniel (who beat him). I think Vettel has well and truly entered his prime. His performance has generally been amazing for quite some time now. He needs the statistical milestones though to cement his greatness because he doesn't have the teammate scalps.

Hamilton has the chance to separate himself from the pack by out-performing Vettel during years like this; when they are in equal machinery. I think he has already achieved more than enough statistically. He now needs more clashes with the other top drivers to cement his legacy. Dropping the WDC in 2016 was a really bad one even with the difference in reliability but I think most people don't really put the blame on Lewis for 2016. Ultimately he seems to be at his very best right now and is the complete package. Arguably, since 2012, he has been in this current form with the occasional dip here and there.

I think a lot rides on these next few seasons (their last in F1). If I had to put money on it, I'd say that Hamilton will be remembered as the best of the three with Alonso right behind and Vettel third. I think Vettel may have another shocker when Raikkonen is finally replaced. For Alonso, it's looking more and more like he won't be in position to challenge for a title again. His last hope is that the McLaren next year is just immediately up there.

This same thread title could have been interchangeable with Seb at the start of the season when he clearly had a length on what Lewis was producing. Some of the drives/moments Fernando has produced this season have been drive of the day stuff, too. It's just that DNF'ing sorta rules you out of that poll.

My take on it, there's nothing measurable between them (inb4 stats), on any given day Alonso/Vettel/Hamilton cannot be beaten by anyone on the grid. Hamilton's blinding pace, Vettels metronome and Alonso's matador (or in 2012, the self fashioned samurai), if I got told as a team boss I could have one but not the other two I'd still think I got the best deal.

I also don't consider Alonso to be from the same era/generation as the other two, remembering he ended Schumachers reign way back when. But that might just be me.

An interesting question, and I appreciate the time you took to lay out your argument. Here's my own thoughts.

First, of course, is the question of generation. Is generation an age thing, or is it based on time - era, even - in F1? By the real, scientific definition of a generation, all the F1 drivers except for Kimi and maybe Alonso at the high end - and Stroll, Ocon and Verstappen at the low end - are in the same generation. Lance Stroll is the youngest F1 driver, at 18, and only a driver old enough to be his parent (let's call it 36, to keep things legal) is part of the previous real generation.

But I prefer to go by a more era-based definition for generation in terms of sportspeople. Alonso and Kimi came into F1 when it was a very different place from Vettel and Hamilton; they proved themselves against the living legend Schumacher, and although the age gap isn't that big, they don't feel like part of the same generation. Similarly, the drivers who came to F1 after Vettel had left Red Bull, Alonso had left Ferrari and Hamilton had joined Mercedes - era-defining moves - don't feel like they're part of that generation either. That makes Ricciardo part of Vettel and Hamilton's generation, but not Max.

So we've eliminated two contenders from best of the generation, effectively making it a question of who is best: Hamilton, Vettel or Ricciardo. However, before you can begin to give an answer, I feel you need to confront the elephant in the room: machinery.

While Vettel and Hamilton have both enjoyed dominant machinery for more than a few years over their careers, Ricciardo never has - nor have Alonso or Max, for that matter. This is the third year Vettel and Hamilton have had cars that let them fight on more or less equal terms; 2010, 2012 and now 2017. Ricciardo has fought Vettel in the same car, of course, but that was only one year. He's never been in comparable machinery to Hamilton, but in 2016 his Red Bull was closely matched with Vettel's Ferrari for some of the season. As well, Ricciardo faces quite possibly the strongest driver of the next generation in the other garage every weekend, something that must surely be taken into account when evaluating his claim to being the best.

Vettel and Hamilton have indeed amassed numbers that make them hard to ignore in the conversation for greatest of their era, but numbers (for me, at least) are not the definition of greatness. Great drivers are defined for me by-

But these drivers had dominant cars for much of their success. Both excelled when in dominant cars and both have arguably struggled when in less-than-dominant cars (Hamilton in the 2009-2012 McLarens and Vettel in the 2015-16 Ferraris).

Both also have been beaten by teammates (Button & Rosberg on Hamilton, Ricciardo on Vettel).

It could easily be argued that Vettel won his four titles in a car which was less dominant than the Mercedes has been since 2014. Even this year, the Mercedes still appears to have the edge.

There could be other drivers in the field who are better than these two but we know car performance massively outweighs driver performance (especially with the current technical regulations).

Alonso, Ricciardo and Verstappen are all contenders. Hulkenberg or Ocon could also be contenders, but it's hard to tell. Ricciardo did comprehensively beat Vettel when in the same car, so maybe he is number 1? Then again, Verstappen appears to have a slight edge in raw speed on Ricciardo...

I do feel that it's way too difficult to make a judgement like that on Hamilton, when it isn't that simple.

If Alonso had a career ending accident in the winter of 2007 (god forbid), how different we would be rating him now?

I actually think he'd be rated higher.

Why ? I think lower. His time after 2007 has proven he can drive any car fast and very close to its potential no matter how badly designed it is, a quality for which he is definitely now generally considered to be No.1. Sterling Moss never won a wdc but he is rated higher than Hawthorn who did so pure winning stats are not everything once you take into account the competitiveness of a driver's equipment during his career and team strategy decisions.

Alonso has made some silly decisions that have affected that e.g. leaving McLaren, not joining Red Bull, leaving Ferrari. Conceivably he could have had another five wdcs (1 McLaren, 4 Red Bull) to add to his current two with the possibility of a record breaking eighth this year with Ferrari if he had made different career decisions. I have great hopes that he gets it right next year and should be in a four way team battle next year for the wdc.

As to the main argument, I have thought what Hamilton did in his rookie year signalled that he could be the best straightaway and only 2011 had slightly dented that opinion for me although clearly that was a learning experience for him which he hasn't repeated.

Hamilton is currently in superb form but I still rate Alonso higher and I still don't find it a tough call.

I don't think Hamilton has had a season that compares to Alonso's best efforts yet, and if Alonso had been with Mercedes between 2014-16 I don't see him losing a multitude of wins to Rosberg. Alonso dominates team mates.

So yeah, I would still put Alonso ahead of Hamilton and solidly in the top ten of all time. Probably at number 7. That being said, Hamilton probably does make my top 10 these days as well.

When the dust settles on the careers of Hamilton , Alonso and Vettel I'd be in a position to answer the question.At the moment I'd say he will have a shout.I find comments that suggest Lewis to be far inferior to Alonso to be absolute claptrap. They have raced together and the result told a different story to that nonsense.

Hamilton is currently in superb form but I still rate Alonso higher and I still don't find it a tough call.

I don't think Hamilton has had a season that compares to Alonso's best efforts yet, and if Alonso had been with Mercedes between 2014-16 I don't see him losing a multitude of wins to Rosberg. Alonso dominates team mates.

So yeah, I would still put Alonso ahead of Hamilton and solidly in the top ten of all time. Probably at number 7. That being said, Hamilton probably does make my top 10 these days as well.

People give an awful, even crazy amount of credit to Alonso for being so much better than Massa.Yeah he's a good bit better than Massa as I believe Lewis and Vettel would have been also.

I really missed the domination in 2007. Is that because you can only dominate if you are vastly superior to the other driver?

I rate Alonso higher than Vettel and Hamilton. Hamilton and Vettel have both been prone to silly errors throughout their careers, and have also benefitted from either class of the field or top 3 cars for most seasons. Granted Alonso has made some bad decisions, but we're not assessing those here.

Vettel I think is flattered by his 4 titles, 2 of which were won from Alonso in the last race. In 2012 had Alonso not been taken out at Spa, or Suzuka, or in 2010 had Ferrari not made a tactical error, we'd be having a very different conversation, if a conversation at all, and I think that shows we place too much emphasis on number of titles. Alonso was the best driver both those seasons, and if you disagree you either didn't watch it or you don't know what you're talking about.

That season in 2012 Alonso had no business finishing second, let alone finishing only 3 points behind. Best season by a driver I can remember having watched F1 since 1990. And the thing is, he does it most seasons. Give him a top 3 car and he'll be there or thereabouts. I don't think you could say that certainly of Vettel, maybe Hamilton given past seasons.

For me the most important statistic and the one which I think the drivers care about the most is number of race wins, followed by podiums. Just so happens Schumi holds all those records, but I think his win / podium statistic is more impressive because it shows how good he was in those seasons when the car wasn't the class of the field. I think it's a better measure of quality over a given period, since we know from last year that 1 DNF at the wrong time can cost you a championship.

Easy call for me: 1. Alonso2. Hamilton3. Vettel

Ask the people who know, and they'll say Alonso is the best driver on the grid.

Hamilton is currently in superb form but I still rate Alonso higher and I still don't find it a tough call.

I don't think Hamilton has had a season that compares to Alonso's best efforts yet, and if Alonso had been with Mercedes between 2014-16 I don't see him losing a multitude of wins to Rosberg. Alonso dominates team mates.

So yeah, I would still put Alonso ahead of Hamilton and solidly in the top ten of all time. Probably at number 7. That being said, Hamilton probably does make my top 10 these days as well.

People give an awful, even crazy amount of credit to Alonso for being so much better than Massa.Yeah he's a good bit better than Massa as I believe Lewis and Vettel would have been also.

I really missed the domination in 2007. Is that because you can only dominate if you are vastly superior to the other driver?

Massa isn't Alonso's only team mate?

And obviously yes... It would be pretty hard to dominate a team mate who was as good as you?

Hamilton is currently in superb form but I still rate Alonso higher and I still don't find it a tough call.

I don't think Hamilton has had a season that compares to Alonso's best efforts yet, and if Alonso had been with Mercedes between 2014-16 I don't see him losing a multitude of wins to Rosberg. Alonso dominates team mates.

So yeah, I would still put Alonso ahead of Hamilton and solidly in the top ten of all time. Probably at number 7. That being said, Hamilton probably does make my top 10 these days as well.

1) The wins he lost last year through bad starts were not because of his incompetence but the particular clutch Mercedes had which at times behaved randomly. Is Hamilton still having crappy starts this year? (NO) How is VET who had better starts last year doing now?(VERY BAD) [It's the car]

2) In Mercedes, the guy who was 1st at the first corner usually won the race. Not sure how ALO was going to override Mercedes strict equal strategy policy. ROS(not ALO, BUT, KOV, BOT) gave major headaches to HAM in qualifying and after reviewing what he did to MSC, I have no doubt he would surprise a few people in qualifying if he was ALO teammate in Mercedes(Not in Ferrari).

3) In 2014 - 2016, Mercedes advantage was so big that they had the luxury of optimizing the car so that both the drivers could equally go fast. [Remember also Dr. Zetsche comment at Monaco 2016 where he said something like "balanced being restored now", after HAM won the race(the race before was Barcelona). They were seeking balance not only in terms of performance but also in the team]. But now that extreme settings are required to win races due to the car design flaws(just like in 2012 with BUT), how is BOT doing? (VERY BAD)

HAM did a lot of damage to ROS when races were wet. And with all due respect, there are better drivers than ALO in this department.To keep it short, Most of the 2014 - 2016 races/championships were manipulated to keep the interest high. At least we had a battle right? [That Mercedes car could go even faster if they needed. Watch again Bahrain 2014 ReStart where HAM had old hard tyres, ROS behind newer soft tyres. They left the other cars in the dust in 4 corners, no wonder they had to hide their secret modes from their drivers.]

Last edited by Pullrod on Tue Sep 19, 2017 8:17 am, edited 1 time in total.

Hamilton is currently in superb form but I still rate Alonso higher and I still don't find it a tough call.

I don't think Hamilton has had a season that compares to Alonso's best efforts yet, and if Alonso had been with Mercedes between 2014-16 I don't see him losing a multitude of wins to Rosberg. Alonso dominates team mates.

So yeah, I would still put Alonso ahead of Hamilton and solidly in the top ten of all time. Probably at number 7. That being said, Hamilton probably does make my top 10 these days as well.

People give an awful, even crazy amount of credit to Alonso for being so much better than Massa.Yeah he's a good bit better than Massa as I believe Lewis and Vettel would have been also.

I really missed the domination in 2007. Is that because you can only dominate if you are vastly superior to the other driver?

Massa isn't Alonso's only team mate?

And obviously yes... It would be pretty hard to dominate a team mate who was as good as you?

Indeed. If however you are going to use seasons like 2010 and 2012 as a barometer to judge Alonso against you have to take his team mate into account.When you look at the list of Alonso's team mates he's dominated he was head and shoulders above them as drivers and therefore bound to dominate them.Even this year people have been waxing lyrical about his performances. Take into account that Vandoorne is a rookie, had a different car to Alonso for a lot of his races and that he himself admitted was driving like a GP2 driver and hadn't made the adjustment to F1 and then it just looks like Alonso is doing what any of the top 5 drivers would be doing.If the comparison was with a proven top 5 driver like Ricciardo or Vettel for instance then I could maybe understand the hype.

All that aside I do firmly believe he's very much in the argument for the best of his generation.I just don't agree with those who think it's not even an argument.

Hamilton is currently in superb form but I still rate Alonso higher and I still don't find it a tough call.

I don't think Hamilton has had a season that compares to Alonso's best efforts yet, and if Alonso had been with Mercedes between 2014-16 I don't see him losing a multitude of wins to Rosberg. Alonso dominates team mates.

So yeah, I would still put Alonso ahead of Hamilton and solidly in the top ten of all time. Probably at number 7. That being said, Hamilton probably does make my top 10 these days as well.

People give an awful, even crazy amount of credit to Alonso for being so much better than Massa.Yeah he's a good bit better than Massa as I believe Lewis and Vettel would have been also.

I really missed the domination in 2007. Is that because you can only dominate if you are vastly superior to the other driver?

Massa isn't Alonso's only team mate?

And obviously yes... It would be pretty hard to dominate a team mate who was as good as you?

Indeed. If however you are going to use seasons like 2010 and 2012 as a barometer to judge Alonso against you have to take his team mate into account.When you look at the list of Alonso's team mates he's dominated he was head and shoulders above them as drivers and therefore bound to dominate them.Even this year people have been waxing lyrical about his performances. Take into account that Vandoorne is a rookie, had a different car to Alonso for a lot of his races and that he himself admitted was driving like a GP2 driver and hadn't made the adjustment to F1 and then it just looks like Alonso is doing what any of the top 5 drivers would be doing.If the comparison was with a proven top 5 driver like Ricciardo or Vettel for instance then I could maybe understand the hype.

All that aside I do firmly believe he's very much in the argument for the best of his generation.I just don't agree with those who think it's not even an argument.

Look at this week ratings where ALO got a 9 nonetheless despite not completing the first lap. But hey it is "magic" Alonso.HAM or VET would not get the same rating if in the same situation. LOLAnd in Ferrari the gap(in term of points) between #1 and #2 driver is bigger than that you will find in other teammate battles. Why is that?

Mercedes car is best of his generation. If Hamilton would drive for Force India or Williams since 2007, he would never be called that title. Maybe Ocon or Wherlein are the best of their generation, and we will never know if they will not get Mercedes drive? "Best of a generation" is a very tricky title. But Hamilton had a chance an he used it very well. And if he is the best of generation, I want to see more respect to Rosberg who happened to beat him one year in the same car. Oh, and Button too.

I think Hamilton would have won a race or two by now if he had been in a Force India or Williams since 2007, the ones where their existing drivers just got podiums. He would have been snapped up by McLaren within a season or two like Senna was by them. Vettel, Ricciardo and Verstappen had advanced from Toro Rosso to Red Bull in a similar way, cream rises to the top.

p.s. Rosberg was already getting respect at Williams as was Button at BAR/Honda/Brawn.

History and opinion would look very different if in 2012 McLaren convinced Lewis to stay - on a lucrative 3 or 4yr deal. Christ, the very good but not great Rosberg could be a 3x Champion.

There are 3-4 elite drivers on the grid and it really all depends on where they are at a given time. Hamilton has found himself in arguably the best ever seat in F1 history. No driver in history has had a car that dominant for that period of 60+ races.

Not a diss on Lewis, he is an all time great, but there are a few other drivers who could have amounted similar stats if the same position fell to them

Last edited by Badgeronimous on Tue Sep 19, 2017 11:09 am, edited 5 times in total.

I think Hamilton would have won a race or two by now if he had been in a Force India or Williams since 2007, the ones where their existing drivers just got podiums. He would have been snapped up by McLaren within a season or two like Senna was by them. Vettel, Ricciardo and Verstappen had advanced from Toro Rosso to Red Bull in a similar way, cream rises to the top.

p.s. Rosberg was already getting respect at Williams as was Button at BAR/Honda/Brawn.

I think Hamilton would have won a race or two by now if he had been in a Force India or Williams since 2007, the ones where their existing drivers just got podiums. He would have been snapped up by McLaren within a season or two like Senna was by them. Vettel, Ricciardo and Verstappen had advanced from Toro Rosso to Red Bull in a similar way, cream rises to the top.

p.s. Rosberg was already getting respect at Williams as was Button at BAR/Honda/Brawn.

Maldonado won a race in a Williams. Doesn't mean that much does it.

Some experts said that the Williams was the best car for part of that season, Hamilton would have done more with it.

You make some interesting points. If there's one thing I would challenge, however, it's that I don't believe he's had roughly equal equipment to Vettel. I think they are roughly similar in race pace, but Mercedes's qualifying advantage is, to quote Vettel, a game changer. It puts him in the enviable position that most of the races this year have been Hamilton's to lose. And I believe that both Vettel or Alonso would at least have matched Lewis' performance this year if they'd been in the Mercedes.

This to me just underlines how much the car will influence people's image of a driver. People talk about Lewis racking up the stats, but if he'd been in any car other than the Mercedes this year he wouldn't have them. That's not to say he hasn't done exceptionally well, but I think at least some of it is hyperbole. I'm often reminded of the quote where Lewis put the fastest lap in a qualifying session, and we're told it was amazing, then Rosberg went faster still and it was dismissed with "the track's improving." And I find that often repeated with Lewis. Every win seems to be accompanied with superlatives, but I don't think they are always merited. Sometimes they are, of course, but on other occasions it's just another day at the office, but it's made into something it's not.

For me it's quite hard to separate the top three, but I think Alonso still edges it. I think Vettel and Lewis are quite evenly matched overall, with different strengths and weaknesses. The only one I'd feel comfortable with saying they were the best of their generation would be Alonso. Assuming he's considered a previous generation, I think it's too close to call between Lewis and Vettel. For me they are both the class of the field (and yes, I'd include Ricciardo in that field) and making a definitive call on one of them now isn't really possible. Everyone will have their preferences - I personally think Vettel edges Hamilton, for example - but much of that is subjective and I don't think one can make any claims with absolute certainty. Senna was the class of his generation, Schumacher of his, Alonso then replaced Schumacher (in my view), while the honours are shared between Lewis and Seb for this one I believe

Hamilton is currently in superb form but I still rate Alonso higher and I still don't find it a tough call.

I don't think Hamilton has had a season that compares to Alonso's best efforts yet, and if Alonso had been with Mercedes between 2014-16 I don't see him losing a multitude of wins to Rosberg. Alonso dominates team mates.

So yeah, I would still put Alonso ahead of Hamilton and solidly in the top ten of all time. Probably at number 7. That being said, Hamilton probably does make my top 10 these days as well.

1) The wins he lost last year through bad starts were not because of his incompetence but the particular clutch Mercedes had which at times behaved randomly. Is Hamilton still having crappy starts this year? (NO) How is VET who had better starts last year doing now?(VERY BAD) [It's the car]

2) In Mercedes, the guy who was 1st at the first corner usually won the race. Not sure how ALO was going to override Mercedes strict equal strategy policy. ROS(not ALO, BUT, KOV, BOT) gave major headaches to HAM in qualifying and after reviewing what he did to MSC, I have no doubt he would surprise a few people in qualifying if he was ALO teammate in Mercedes(Not in Ferrari).

3) In 2014 - 2016, Mercedes advantage was so big that they had the luxury of optimizing the car so that both the drivers could equally go fast. [Remember also Dr. Zetsche comment at Monaco 2016 where he said something like "balanced being restored now", after HAM won the race(the race before was Barcelona). They were seeking balance not only in terms of performance but also in the team]. But now that extreme settings are required to win races due to the car design flaws(just like in 2012 with BUT), how is BOT doing? (VERY BAD)

HAM did a lot of damage to ROS when races were wet. And with all due respect, there are better drivers than ALO in this department.To keep it short, Most of the 2014 - 2016 races/championships were manipulated to keep the interest high. At least we had a battle right? [That Mercedes car could go even faster if they needed. Watch again Bahrain 2014 ReStart where HAM had old hard tyres, ROS behind newer soft tyres. They left the other cars in the dust in 4 corners, no wonder they had to hide their secret modes from their drivers.]

Indeed,

Rosberg would take wins and fight for the title with any driver alongside him over 2014-2016 due to the points system, Mercedes strategy rules and the cars not really being able to overtake one another.

Nico won 20 races alongside Hamilton, 9 of them Hamilton had a mechanical issue in either the race of qualifying. The other 11 consisted of Hamilton messing up the start at least 3-4 time from pole and then you have races like Singapore 2016 where he missed Practice 2 and Practice 3.

Nico would get at least 15 wins against any driver no matter how good they were. He would also fight and take the title to the final race at least in 2014 and 2016 given the reliability of Hamiltons car.

Given the rate Massa and Trulli were able to out qualify Alonso, Nico would also get quite a few other wins too. He is a very good driver in his own right.

History and opinion would look very different if in 2012 McLaren convinced Lewis to stay - on a lucrative 3 or 4yr deal. Christ, the very good but not great Rosberg could be a 3x Champion.

There are 3-4 elite drivers on the grid and it really all depends on where they are at a given time. Hamilton has found himself in arguably the best ever seat in F1 history. No driver in history has had a car that dominant for that period of 60+ races.

Not a diss on Lewis, he is an all time great, but there are a few other drivers who could have amounted similar stats if the same position fell to them

I am afraid it is not how it works.Mercedes of today(fans, team, Project One) is exactly what McLaren could have been if Ron Dennis played his cards right. Hamilton's move to Mercedes was the signal McLaren was officially dead and any good engineer would want to drive for the best.

Do you remember Mercedes website/Merchandising/Public Relations before Hamilton went there? I bet you don't. It was exactly like their cars on track. Rubbish.Mercedes built the best engine and they wanted the best driver(not only on the track but with the media/fans too) to replace Schumacher.

Many years from now people will talk about the disaster McLaren made by not retaining Hamilton. It is telling they(McLaren) have scored 0 poles and 0 wins since he left the house despite having a Mercedes engine for the years 2013 and 2014(People often forget this little fact).

Hamilton is a winner, the kind of guy who is born "lucky" so that success will come wherever he goes. You will be a fool(a big one) to bet against him not winning anymore.

Last edited by Pullrod on Tue Sep 19, 2017 12:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

History and opinion would look very different if in 2012 McLaren convinced Lewis to stay - on a lucrative 3 or 4yr deal. Christ, the very good but not great Rosberg could be a 3x Champion.

There are 3-4 elite drivers on the grid and it really all depends on where they are at a given time. Hamilton has found himself in arguably the best ever seat in F1 history. No driver in history has had a car that dominant for that period of 60+ races.

Not a diss on Lewis, he is an all time great, but there are a few other drivers who could have amounted similar stats if the same position fell to them

I am afraid it is not how it works.Mercedes of today(fans, team, Project One) is exactly what McLaren could have been if Ron Dennis played his cards right. Hamilton's move to Mercedes was the signal McLaren was officially dead and any good engineer would want to drive for the best.

Do you remember Mercedes website/Merchandising/Public Relations before Hamilton went there? I bet you don't. It was exactly like their cars on track. Rubbish.Mercedes built the best engine and they wanted the best driver(not only on the track but with the media/fans too) to replace Schumacher.

Many years from now people will talk about the disaster McLaren made by not retaining Hamilton. It is telling they(McLaren) have scored 0 poles and 0 wins since he left the house despite having a Mercedes engine for the years 2013 and 2014(People often forget this little fact).

Hamilton is a winner, the kind of guy who is born "lucky" so that success will come wherever he goes. You will be a fool(a big one) if you bet against him not winning anymore.

History and opinion would look very different if in 2012 McLaren convinced Lewis to stay - on a lucrative 3 or 4yr deal. Christ, the very good but not great Rosberg could be a 3x Champion.

There are 3-4 elite drivers on the grid and it really all depends on where they are at a given time. Hamilton has found himself in arguably the best ever seat in F1 history. No driver in history has had a car that dominant for that period of 60+ races.

Not a diss on Lewis, he is an all time great, but there are a few other drivers who could have amounted similar stats if the same position fell to them

I am afraid it is not how it works.Mercedes of today(fans, team, Project One) is exactly what McLaren could have been if Ron Dennis played his cards right. Hamilton's move to Mercedes was the signal McLaren was officially dead and any good engineer would want to drive for the best.

Do you remember Mercedes website/Merchandising/Public Relations before Hamilton went there? I bet you don't. It was exactly like their cars on track. Rubbish.Mercedes built the best engine and they wanted the best driver(not only on the track but with the media/fans too) to replace Schumacher.

Many years from now people will talk about the disaster McLaren made by not retaining Hamilton. It is telling they(McLaren) have scored 0 poles and 0 wins since he left the house despite having a Mercedes engine for the years 2013 and 2014(People often forget this little fact).

Hamilton is a winner, the kind of guy who is born "lucky" so that success will come wherever he goes. You will be a fool(a big one) to bet against him not winning anymore.

It is absolutely idiotic to suggest that Hamilton had anything to do with the fact that Mercedes developed a dominant car (which they started work on long before he joined) or that Honda failed to develop an adequate engine for McLaren.

I do not see how it is that so many can think of Alonso being in a previous generation. Alonso is 36 years old, Lewis is 32. If I look at my family, but that standard me and my siblings cover 3 generations as there are 12 years between oldest and youngest. In my understanding, an example of a generation would be a son, father and grandfather as being 3 generations... all siblings would be of the same generaton. that certainly would not be the criteria many on this thread are using. I am pretty sure that every four years does not define a new generation, however.

I don't think you can separate Alonso from this generation, though perhaps down the line, one can say that the real youngsters like Max are in a different generation, but not Lewis and Seb as I see it.

History and opinion would look very different if in 2012 McLaren convinced Lewis to stay - on a lucrative 3 or 4yr deal. Christ, the very good but not great Rosberg could be a 3x Champion.

There are 3-4 elite drivers on the grid and it really all depends on where they are at a given time. Hamilton has found himself in arguably the best ever seat in F1 history. No driver in history has had a car that dominant for that period of 60+ races.

Not a diss on Lewis, he is an all time great, but there are a few other drivers who could have amounted similar stats if the same position fell to them

I am afraid it is not how it works.Mercedes of today(fans, team, Project One) is exactly what McLaren could have been if Ron Dennis played his cards right. Hamilton's move to Mercedes was the signal McLaren was officially dead and any good engineer would want to drive for the best.

Do you remember Mercedes website/Merchandising/Public Relations before Hamilton went there? I bet you don't. It was exactly like their cars on track. Rubbish.Mercedes built the best engine and they wanted the best driver(not only on the track but with the media/fans too) to replace Schumacher.

Many years from now people will talk about the disaster McLaren made by not retaining Hamilton. It is telling they(McLaren) have scored 0 poles and 0 wins since he left the house despite having a Mercedes engine for the years 2013 and 2014(People often forget this little fact).

Hamilton is a winner, the kind of guy who is born "lucky" so that success will come wherever he goes. You will be a fool(a big one) if you bet against him not winning anymore.

Who is betting on him not winning anymore?

People assume with Hamilton still in McLaren he would have scored 0 wins, 0 poles and 0 championships between the years 2013 - 2017. UNLIKELY(very)1) A "secret" test for Honda could have been made. 2) He could have joined Rosberg in Mercedes. 3) They could have ditched Honda sooner(for a Mercedes)

I am not sure the Honda deal would have been made the way it was or Mercedes would have had the "power" they had once they snatched Hamilton from McLaren.You may not like it, but Hamilton is the only Megastar on today track, much like Valentino Rossi in MotoGp so where they go is important for the SPORT.

I rarely use the word "best" for Hamilton because I don't feel it is necessary since it is obvious!. He is a born genius, an artist. The kind of guy that changes and transcends the sport and who people will remember for a very very very long time.

History and opinion would look very different if in 2012 McLaren convinced Lewis to stay - on a lucrative 3 or 4yr deal. Christ, the very good but not great Rosberg could be a 3x Champion.

There are 3-4 elite drivers on the grid and it really all depends on where they are at a given time. Hamilton has found himself in arguably the best ever seat in F1 history. No driver in history has had a car that dominant for that period of 60+ races.

Not a diss on Lewis, he is an all time great, but there are a few other drivers who could have amounted similar stats if the same position fell to them

I am afraid it is not how it works.Mercedes of today(fans, team, Project One) is exactly what McLaren could have been if Ron Dennis played his cards right. Hamilton's move to Mercedes was the signal McLaren was officially dead and any good engineer would want to drive for the best.

Do you remember Mercedes website/Merchandising/Public Relations before Hamilton went there? I bet you don't. It was exactly like their cars on track. Rubbish.Mercedes built the best engine and they wanted the best driver(not only on the track but with the media/fans too) to replace Schumacher.

Many years from now people will talk about the disaster McLaren made by not retaining Hamilton. It is telling they(McLaren) have scored 0 poles and 0 wins since he left the house despite having a Mercedes engine for the years 2013 and 2014(People often forget this little fact).

Hamilton is a winner, the kind of guy who is born "lucky" so that success will come wherever he goes. You will be a fool(a big one) to bet against him not winning anymore.

It is absolutely idiotic to suggest that Hamilton had anything to do with the fact that Mercedes developed a dominant car (which they started work on long before he joined) or that Honda failed to develop an adequate engine for McLaren.

It is not my fault you have ZERO business sense.F1 is a business before it is a sport.Sure they will build a dominant car only to have J. Palmer(A guy I respect but still) to drive it. Right Right.Few of you have your eyes and ears wide open so my words will fall on deaf ears.

History and opinion would look very different if in 2012 McLaren convinced Lewis to stay - on a lucrative 3 or 4yr deal. Christ, the very good but not great Rosberg could be a 3x Champion.

There are 3-4 elite drivers on the grid and it really all depends on where they are at a given time. Hamilton has found himself in arguably the best ever seat in F1 history. No driver in history has had a car that dominant for that period of 60+ races.

Not a diss on Lewis, he is an all time great, but there are a few other drivers who could have amounted similar stats if the same position fell to them

I am afraid it is not how it works.Mercedes of today(fans, team, Project One) is exactly what McLaren could have been if Ron Dennis played his cards right. Hamilton's move to Mercedes was the signal McLaren was officially dead and any good engineer would want to drive for the best.

Do you remember Mercedes website/Merchandising/Public Relations before Hamilton went there? I bet you don't. It was exactly like their cars on track. Rubbish.Mercedes built the best engine and they wanted the best driver(not only on the track but with the media/fans too) to replace Schumacher.

Many years from now people will talk about the disaster McLaren made by not retaining Hamilton. It is telling they(McLaren) have scored 0 poles and 0 wins since he left the house despite having a Mercedes engine for the years 2013 and 2014(People often forget this little fact).

Hamilton is a winner, the kind of guy who is born "lucky" so that success will come wherever he goes. You will be a fool(a big one) if you bet against him not winning anymore.

Who is betting on him not winning anymore?

People assume with Hamilton still in McLaren he would have scored 0 wins, 0 poles and 0 championships between the years 2013 - 2017. UNLIKELY(very)1) A "secret" test for Honda could have been made. 2) He could have joined Rosberg in Mercedes. 3) They could have ditched Honda sooner(for a Mercedes)

I am not sure the Honda deal would have been made the way it was or Mercedes would have had the "power" they had once they snatched Hamilton from McLaren.You may not like it, but Hamilton is the only Megastar on today track, much like Valentino Rossi in MotoGp so where they go is important for the SPORT.

I rarely use the word "best" for Hamilton because I don't feel it is necessary since it is obvious!. He is a born genius, an artist. The kind of guy that changes and transcends the sport and who people will remember for a very very very long time.

Sorry, not trying to be funny but don't quite understand your post. It looks to me like you are suggesting the following:

1. Lewis would have overcome the car deficiencies and had wins and poles (and titles!) had he remained at McLaren.2. His presence would have changed the way McLaren dealt with Honda and Hamilton would have guided them to do some secret testing with Honda fir4st3. This is what happened, so unclear why this is listed as "could?"4. Hamilton would have had a hand in engine supplier decisions and guided McLaren to drop Honda sooner than they have done

Again, sorry if I've gotten the wrong end of the stick, but this is how it reads to me. Would you confirm?